wedding? >> what was the best part? >> when harry turned to her and said wow, during one point during the sermon. i thought that was sweet. >> i liked the little kid photo bombing. >> i heard you and stephanie rule wer reuhl were -- >> good news, stephanie's joining me on set. bye, craig. it's 11:00 a.m. out west, and 2:00 p.m. in washington where we're following surprise, breaking news from the white house, president trump just concluded an oval office meeting with south korea's president and the summit planned with north korea just three weeks from now is right now in jeopardy. >> we are working on something, and you know, there's a chance that it will work out, there's a chance there's a very substantial chance that it won't work out, i don't want to waste a lot of time, and i'm sure he doesn't want to waste a lot of time. so there's a very substantial chance that it won't work out. and that's okay. that doesn't mean that it won't

work out over a period of time, but it may not work out for june 12. >> one of the biggest sticking points remains denuclearization and whether president trump will accept any agreement without it. >> it would certainly be better if it were all in one. does it have to be? i don't think i want to totally commitment. but all in one would be a lot better. >> so where does this leave the scheduled one-on-one that the white house has been extolling for weeks, you know, the one they already made a coin to commemorate? and our question is, if the singapore summit is called off, does authority korea north kore testing ballistic missiles,? reporters have another chance to press the white house on this upcoming meeting, there is a briefing scheduled next hour. but we start this hour with our

team of reporters and analysts. kristen welker, pentagon correspondent, hans nicholls, gordon chang is the columnist for the daily beast and the author of "north korea takes on the world." and stephanie rueuhl, nbc host and business correspondent. let's start with you, craig, you're at the white house. there was that reporting from the "new york times" over the weekend that said that the white house was surprised that north korea was walking back its intentions in this meeting? >> reporter: is white house e o echoes what you just heard from president trump in that evoval office just moments ago. it was striking to hear it come from the president himself. in terms of why, there's this new skepticism about whether

this meeting is going to move forward, it comes as north korea last week threatened to pull the plug on the meeting after the u.s. and south korea launched those preplanned military exercises and in the words of south korea, said that that would be fine, they changed their tune last week, started flexing their muscles and that really caught the white house off guard, it caught the president off guard as well. of course you also had what you reference, john bolton suggesting that north korea would be like the libya model, well, the leader of libya was ultimately after the nukes were taken away, taken out of power and as you know, killed. so that was thought to ultimately royal north korea as well. president trump tried to walk that back, by the way, he said this is not going to be the north korea model at all, in fact, today, katie, during that meeting, he reassured kim jong-un that he would make safety a priority if the two were to meet. take a listen. >> we will guarantee his safety,

and we have talked about that from the beginning, he will be safe, he will be happy, his country will be rich. >> and white house officials have been very clear that their ultimate goal is not regime change, that it is denuclearization. what does that look like? what would the terms be? of course that's what all the questions lie and whether this summit actually happens. >> all signs point to kim jong-un equating denuclearization with regime change, that is his only safety net, his only leverage here is the fact that he does have nuclear weapons. hans nicholls, i know you have reporting out of the pentagon, there's movement there? >> officials here at the pentagon continue to stress that they are prepared for any possibility. and let me just update you on the kind of assets that they have in the western pacific. the guided missile destroyer, a ship that would knock out any

potential missile that would be headed towards japan or guam. that gives the number soft ships in the area to 11. may 16 they did a bomber mission, they call this a continued presence mission. they left guam and flew up with japan, a joint mission and then turned around. they continue to stress the pentagon is they want to preserve the president's ability to make decisions, to have options, and that's what they're priding themselves on, katie? >> every time i hear reporting that the president was surprised that kim jong-un would change his tone, it's almost as if he's never opened a history book, or nobody's ever given him the history of what negotiations have been like with the leaders of north korea. >> first of all, these are north koreans after all so he should have expected it. and another reason is there were

those two surprise summits, where kim went to china and spoke to xi jinping, that actually gave kim the confidence that china was going to back him. we have seen in the last 2 1/2 months or so, china's economy has become more open. that wouldn't have happened except china's pumping much more oil to the kim regime. >> and so let's talk about the president as a deal maker. this is supposed to be, this could be his moment, he would never say that he deserved the nobel peace prize, but many other people are saying it according to him. but when we look back on the president's record of making a deal, it cemeseems like this administration is giving up on a deal between israel and the palestinians, there's a number of other examples. >> they walked away from tpp saying they were going to find a better guideal. they said nafta stinks anding i'm going to give you something better. and then they are going after

this chinese trade deficit. so to say that this president has never opened a history book, don'ting be surpri inbe surpris. >> howhis advisers have not sat him down and said they may be being agreeable now, but they'll change their mind next month. >> you're talking about people that can't even ask the president to read a report. he will only look at things that have his name is bold letters. they only get ten minutes time with him. on friday, he said we're having great conversations with china, we have gotten $200 billion, they're going to push down the deficit, by sunday, he said, well, we're on the same page, but maybe i got ahead of myself. the sad thing that's happening with regard to the president negotiated with china is china has a long-term plan, they know where they want to be.

as a world superpower in 2025, and in 2050. the united states, you've got steve mnuchin and peter navarro telling each other off and they're on the same team a week ago. >> so what happens if this summit does not happen? does kim jong-un go back to where he was before this and start testing nuclear weapons again? >> well, you know, his foreign minister in new york last month promised a test in the atmosphere over the pacific. so that will probably happen. so every country that has nukes has done an atmospheric test. but all trump has to do is increase the sanctions on north korea and go after both big power sponsors, russia and china. because those chinese banks, all four of the big four banks have actually been money laundering for the north koreans, that's a violation of international law. we could be pushing them in both directions. and that's what president trump's going to have to do. it he could ignore china's

busting, if things go well with kim, but if things don't go with with -- well with kim, he could -- >> that's always the question, how much of this is about the president's interest and how much of it is about the interest of the united states. and those questions continually get raised because the president did not divest, he did not separate himself from his business and they are continuing to do foreign deals even though they said they wouldn't. moon jae-unis not a fa fly on te wall. >> moon is trying to reassure president trump that the north koreans actually do want to give up their nukes because moon has been on record as saying that -- >> do they want to give up their nukes? >> of course not. of course not. >> that's all they have in north korea. if they don't have nukes, what

do they have? >> the point is, our president has the ability to force them to do what they don't want to do. but the president has to exercise political will, he has to go after the chinese banks, he's got to go after some other things too that he hasn't been lg willing to do. it doesn't matter what kim wants the president has the leverage in this case. >> does the president have to do something short of denuclearization? what about a freeze? >> reporter: the answer to that is no, he's been pretty accident that denuclearization is not off the table. we're hoping to get a better readout of what was discussed. one of the topics may have been, remember, the south korea president, the south korean diplomats were bringing this to the white house, did the president feel that they were --

that's undoubtedly one of the topics that was discussed today. sarah sanders will speak in about an hour so we're hoping to ask her more about this. >> what you've heard described as the libya model. john bolton has said that they have that in mind when it came to negotiations with north korea. but when you look at libya and gadhafi, i wonder how he would expect that to fall on welcoming ears with kim jong-un? >> think about the 2003 libya model, which was a program to get rid of their weapons of mass destruction, it bears noting at the time that libya was much further behind what north korea is today, in terms of the nuclear program. and then think of the 2011 model, which was an air war, which was set up to make sure that there wasn't any sort of genocide inside of libya, you had a lot of allies, the french,

the british participating in that. that's why it was so perilous for john bolton to jenninmentio libya model, he's talking about the 2003 model about denuclearization, but kim hears the 2011 model where gadhafi was was overthrown. >> do you envision john bolton trying to push this again? i mean is this going to end up with this escalating rhetoric between these two leaders? >> john bolton is hawkish on this issue, and he's had some real concerns about this meeting in the first place, he was one of the president's closest e advisors who was pushinging the president to get out of this deal. so i wouldn't be surprised if in fact these talks don't happen on the 12th, that we saw some stepped up rhetoric from john bolton, but what ultimately will

the policy position become of the white house, that remains to be seen. again, though, the white house still moving forward, but marcus randal randalls -- plans for this summit, there's no indication that that's not going to happen. >> you know what makes me crazy? >> what. >> credit to john bolton, he's never hid who he is. months ago, he wrote that we should have a pre-emptive strike on north korea. that goes back to the white house and the president not doing their home work. why anybody is saying blame john bolton, john bolton's foreign policy views are no surprise. for the white house to have to dance around it, oh, is john bolton is right guy? then why didn't you think about that before you hired him? >> that's a good question, stephanie reuhl, that should have been our big question. what are we going to do with the collectors coins if there's no summit? >> collect them i guess.

i know there's challenge coins and how do you give yourself an olympic gold medal before you take up the sport? >> sounds like something they might do. gordon chang and my new bestie stephanie reuhl, appreciate it, guys. next up, just how far will the doj be pushed to investigate the investigators? it took guts to start my business. but as it grew bigger and bigger, it took a whole lot more. that's why i switched to the spark cash card from capital one. with it, i earn unlimited 2% cash back on everything i buy. everything. and that 2% cash back adds up to thousands of dollars each year... so i can keep growing my business in big leaps! what's in your wallet?

and it's time to get outside. pack in even more adventure with audible. with the largest selection of audiobooks. audible lets you follow plot twists off the beaten track. or discover magic when you hit the open road. with the free audible app, your stories go wherever you do. and for just $14.95 a month you get a credit, good for any audiobook. if you don't like it exchange it any time. no questions asked. you can also roll your credits to the next month if you don't use them. so take audible with you this summer... on the road... on the trail... or to the beach. start a 30-day trial and your first audiobook is free. cancel anytime, and your books are yours to keep forever. no matter where you go this summer make it better with audible. text summer17 to 500500 to start listening today.

and i heard that my cousin's so, wife's sister's husband was a lawyer, so i called him. but he never called me back! if your cousin's wife's sister's husband isn't a lawyer, call legalzoom and we'll connect you with an attorney. legalzoom. where life meets legal. sure. mom,what's up son?alk? i can't be your it guy anymore. what? you guys have xfinity.

you can do this. what's a good wifi password, mom? you still have to visit us. i will. no. make that the password: "you_stillóhave_toóvisit_us." that's a good one. [ chuckles ] download the xfinity my account app and set a password you can easily remember. one more way comcast is working to fit into your life, not the other way around.

president trump is putting the pressure on his fbi and justice department. >> a lot of people are saying they had spies in my campaign. if they had spies in my campaign, that would be a disgrace to this country. that would be one of the biggest insults that anyone's ever seen and it would be very illegal, aside from everything else. it would probably make any political event ever look like small potatoes. >> rosenstein is already walking a fine line as he attempts to protect the independence of the doj while appeasing the president and his party who are demanding information about an fbi informant. yesterday an agreement was reached during a white house meeting to allow select lawmakers to review highly classified and other informations connected to that source, a man who has aided robert mueller's probe, points to house republicans. prior to that meeting,

rosenstein had already agreed to expand an inspector general investigation to find out whether trump's campaign was infiltrated or surveilled for political purposes, a point for president trump. but the house republicans have made a new request, they want to look into conduct at the justice department. so what could be called concessions by rosenstein, the attacks by the gop are not stopping. just yesterday attempts by the attorney general said the doj will not be extorted. >> there have been people who have been making threats privately and publicly against me for quite some time and i think they should understand by now, the justice department is not going to be extorted, we're going to do what's required by the rule of law and any kind of threats that anybody makes are not going to affect the way we do our job. >> so our second big question today is this, how far will the doj be pushed to investigate spying on trump's campaign?

matt is a reporter for "the washington post." and matt, based on the president's comments today, what would you say happened? is this the doj rolling over? is it rosenstein and wray rolling over or is this them just trying to, i don't know, is it a semantics argument about whether they are a -- allowing the president to get his way? >> this is a strategic maneuver on the part of the justice department. so as i read that statement, it sounds like they agreed to reveal some information to lawmakers, but it didn't explicitly say that it would turn over documents. they in the past have said they would brief devin nunes and do sort of a classified briefing for him and maybe this is just that. as far as the inspector general, i don't think the doj thinks

that's a -- and it's possible his work would have naturally led him here anyway, so i think maybe that is a very, very modest concession. >> so julia ainsley, one of our national security reporters here said that the president does have the authority to declassify whatever he wants. so he could declassify whatever is within the doj that the republicans and the house do want to see, by making john kelly a part of this, and allowing john kelly to review it. is that an area where the president and this administration have somewhat capitulated? >> well, there's a difference between what he has the power to do and sort of what is the right thing and the normal thing to do. certainly the president can declassify whatever he wants. he could today say all of this stuff is declassified, let's air it publicly. but this stuff is about a criminal investigation of his campaign. i think that would be deeply unsettling to leaders at the

justice department alum of the justice development if he were to do something like that and some would reveal it as an obstructive act, that he would reveal something that the investigators don't want revealed. so certainly he has a lot of power in this respect. but he himself, much like rod rosenstein does seem to be walking a line here and pushing the justice department, but only pushing them so much. >> i do want to ask you about that, because everybody says that rosenstein is between a rock and a hard place, yes, but if you look at all the public opinion polls out there, about the mueller investigation, about rosenstein, the public does not want the about to fire him, the public does not want to set off a chain of events and that does not include even the presidedoj supporter. is he just trying to tear down the credibility and stopping short of doing anything that would trigger a constitutional crisis in the way we saw during

nixon administration? >> sure. i mean,some some ways, i think people, you know, people at the justice department have said to me, well, maybe he learned his lesson with the firing of jim comey, that really came back to bite him, that is a key component of mueller's obstruction inquiry now. so maybe he's learned a lesson and maybe he feels a little boxed in here. you know, i think one of the things at play here is congressional republicans keep making document requests and the justice department keeps satisfying them in some respect. but you wonder if we'll get to a point where the justice department can't satisfy their requests and is that what they're ultimately aiming for? i mean are they sort of wanting to be rejected so they can raise a big stink about justice department misconduct and use that to undermine robert mueller's probe. >> jake, let's ask you that question, is that the point? >> i don't know if it's the point, but just having been through this rodeo many times before, members of congress are

never satisfied with the documents they get. they always want more, they always feel like they want everything that exists, everything on paper, because they see themselves, rightly so in some respects, as an independent branch of government as a check on the administrative branch and the executive branch. i think a lot of people are asking if there's a second request for a special counsel, if it's not that, it's going to be more documents, as matt said, it's going to be more, more, more, more, and some people think it has the political impact of making jeff sessions and the department of justice which has clearly fallen out of grace with this president makes them look bad and if you look at the folks that were up there today, calling for this second special counsel, there were people who were either i'd lodgical ideal logically close to the president of the united states, or people that were close to the president of the united states. these are people who have been

involved in oversight in the past, but remember, this republican congress held the last attorney general in contempt of congress, so this is nothing new. >> jake, matt, guys, thank you very much. and joining me now is david france, joining me from national view, and jennifer rogers, former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern driktd istrictw york, she's also director of the columbia law school advancement of public integrity. jennifer, is the doj still independent? >> i think so, yes, but we're getting closer and closer to that line. i think rosenstein and chris wray are doing their best to hold the line, and there's a request that is so outrageous that they have to refuse it and get fired or resign. >> is it appropriate for the aig to be looking into this? >> igs looking into a whole range of conduct and they often take requests from congress, referrals are congress, so this

one came through the president kind of behalf of congress, but it's still not unusual for congress to say anything in the purview of what department of justice folks are doing are within the igs jurisdiction. >> so this confidential source who said there were spies embedded in the trump campaign, what does that do for the doj's ability to cultivate sources? >> it is problematic for them to give sources in the doj and the cia, they feel like they will be protected and their families will be protected if need be and this is a huge blow to law enforcement, no question about that. >> what do you think of this president making this demand? >> i think he's doing what he does very well, which is to confuse the matter, muddy up the water, so at the end of the day, when we finally get the results of the mueller investigation, it will be so thoroughly discredited that no one will actually look at the facts or

care about it. and it's so unfortunate. i mean jake said something about congress being a check, right, independent, well, not in this case. because these congressional republicans are, i expect, carrying water for trump, and they are part of this confusion and making sure that by the time we get the real facts, i just want to say one last thing. when someone is fighting so hard to muddy up the water and create chaos, it tells me there is something someone is hiding. >> let's go from that, david, the "new york times" editorial board has made this point, one doesn't have to agree with the particulars of every investigation to see the fundamental difference here, the members of our law enforcement and intelligence communities are trying to protect the country, donald trump and his supporters are simply trying to protect donald trump. >> well, donald trump and his

supporters -- well, let me say this about his supporters, his core supporters are now firmly in the belief that this entire investigation from the outset has been politically motivated in bad faith and investigation of nothing as an insurance policy against trump's election. that is a core belief amongst the donald trump base, and that's the operating assumption of some members of congress. and when you understand that, a lot of their actions begin to make sense. but i would disagree with a statement earlier, i think if there is a report from mueller, that has concrete evidence of wrong doing and misconduct, especially misconduct related to collusion and the election, if there is that evidence, i know for a fact there are republican members of congress who are keeping an open mind on that, and that would detonate so many narratives in the trump base

that i think it would fundamentally change the conversation. >> david, how do you know for a fact? i hate to be the negative nancy here, but it seems like the goal post s have been moved quite a lot when it comes to what republican lawmakers say they will or will not stand for. >> i do think that you're right, their goal posts have moved, but it's an awful lot of the same people moving the goal posts. i go back to a statement that trey gowdy made, in the middle of the last wave of controversy over fisa gate. he said there would be a russia investigation regarding any misconduct regarding the carte - page fisa application. there's still facts out there that george popadopoulos got classified information. and there's people out there that want to see that fleshed us. the republican caucus is not

actually a monolith here. >> i agree. but a lot of chose republicthos members of congress are retiring. >> true enough, so a lot depends on the timing of the release of mueller's report, when it comes. but what we're seeing right now is an awful lot of flailing by partisans, so when that report comes, or when a much more definitive accounting of the 2016 election comes, i think some of the more serious voices, and maybe i'm wildly optimistic here, i think some more serious voices can come forward then and weigh in on the basis of facts and evidence and not on the rampant speculation that is dominating commentary about russia. >> in talking about rampant speculation, let's just make a point about loretta lynch and president bill clinton, during the 2016 campaign when he went on the tarmac and into her plane

for a brief meeting. is it -- i know the president is the president now, but are the circumstances much different? i mean there was all this shade thrown at bill clinton and loretta lynch. and this is the president meeting with rod rosenstein, demanding an investigation be done into the investigation into him. >> right and here's another difference, bill clinton and loretta lynch both insisted they didn't talk about that at all. >> donald trump's saying, yeah, i told them to do what they're doing. >> exactly, and him saying i was wearing my president hat and not my subject of a criminal investigation hat. first of all that's not true becauseessential ly admitted as much when he said they wanted the documents. and you're not wearing the president hat when you call for an investigation even if it doesn't involve the president. >> somebody keeps saying yes? who keeps saying yes?

>> this is maria. absolutely the lines that have been crossed between the white house, the criminal investigation and the department of justice, it's mind-boggling and i just hope the members of congress, i wish i was as optimistic, but that people remember those who have took the oath of upholding the constitution will remember their obligation is to the people of this country, to our country, not to an individual who seems to discard all the rules that you're supposed to, as president of the united states. >> maria, jennifer, and david, guys, and ladies. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you. and a reporter was grabbed and shoved out of the building while trying to attend an event at the environmental protection agency earlier today. other reporters from several news organizations were not allowed in. the associated press, cnn and the environmental news outlet e & e were kicked out of a

national summit on harmful water contamina contaminants, where administrator scott pruitt was speaking, a statement saying this was simply an issue of the room reaching capacity, which reporters were aware of prior to the event, a little while later the spokesman added that it will open the rest of the day to the press. brady from "the washington post," brady, you've been studying scott pruitt and the epa extensively, what do you think happened today? what's your take? >> i think it's important to point out that there is not a one-time incident, but part of a larger pattern, perhaps not with the physicality of it, but certainly the sense that scott pruitt has operated largely in secret, since he's taken over the epa, he's never announced his trips, foreign and domestic, there's been reporters excluded from other meetings at times and so i think it's important to put it in the context of that sort of approach that the epa under

scott pruitt has taken to the media and to the press covering what the agency is doing. >> i'm a little confused, the epa is talking about water contaminants, wouldn't the epa want to get that message out to the public? >> the epa certainly wants attention on this, it wants attention that it's trying to get its message out that it's paying attention to water pollution across the country with this meeting, but of course, as you and other versus noted, that the story has now become excluding these outlets from the meeting and it kind of steps on its own message. >> here's what salon says about how the epa has operated, the epa has consistently refused to provide information and attacked journalists and outlets whose coverage it did fwhonot like, t antagonist antagonistic stance towards the media mirrors president donald

trump's stance. who is the epa working for? the president or the people? >> i think it's fair to say, that these reporters are just trying to do their job, as we all are who cover this agency. and it is at the end of the day, a public agency, and i would argue, one that should be open, you know, so that we can just write about what's going on there in the very most basic sense. >> it water contaminants, i think everybody would like to know about that. "the washington post," brady dennis, brady, thank you very much. next up, follow the money, the details of an eye opening new investigation, entitled the prince, the president and the new fortune seekers. verned thou. commanded armies... yielded to no one. when i found you in my dna, i learned where my strength comes from.

my name is courtney mckinney, and this is my ancestrydna story. now with 5 times more detail than other dna tests. order your kit at ancestrydna.com during the fall, everyone who has medicare may be eligible to choose a new medicare health

plan. but you may be able to choose a new plan right now. if you answer 'yes' to any of these questions: are you turning 65? do you have both medicare and medicaid? do you have medicare? and are you losing employer health coverage? if you answered yes just once, you may be able to choose a new medicare health plan right now. call humana at the number on your screen to see if you qualify. and we'll send you this helpful medicare decision guide. the call is free. and there's no obligation. humana has nearly 30 years of medicare experience and offers a wide range of all-in-one medicare advantage health plans that include medical and prescription drug coverage and valuable extras like: a 24-hour nurse advice line. the silver sneakers fitness program. and mail order prescription coverage. all for an affordable monthly plan premium. and, in some areas, no plan premium. with humana, you'll get more than original medicare alone and have the peace of mind of knowing you're covered for

doctor visits and hospital stays. plus, routine physicals and preventive screenings. and when it comes to prescriptions, in 2016, humana's medicare advantage prescription drug plan members saved an estimated $6500 on average on their prescription costs. so call a licensed humana sales agent at the number on your screen, and say yes to getting the right health care coverage without having to wait for it. how do you win at business? stay at laquinta. where we're changing with contemporary make-overs.

then, use the ultimate power handshake, the upper hander with a double palm grab. who has the upper hand now? start winning today. book now at lq.com. candidate donald trump vowed to drain washington's swamp, but an extensive new report shows a fund raiser and his business partner who's now correspondenting with mueller's probe, formed lucrative access to president trump. the ap reports s elliott freudy passing the prince's praise and messaging straight to the president's ears.

the campaign to alter u.s. policy in the middle east and gain a fortune for himself, found that one of the president's top money men found the swamp as navigable as ever with trump in office. devon butler is a member of the ap's international investigative team. desmond, that was really quite the piece and i suggested everybody watching go out and read the entire thing. but if you can synthesize what you learn for us. >> sure, well, first of all, thank you for that. you know, this is the story that's fundamentally about the sale of american foreign policy, and it really started with two men meeting at the inauguration and they were up and running right away, and there were millions of dollars coming from george nader in the uae to fund

a lobbying campaign that would change u.s. foreign policy. >> so when they're taking money from interests in the middle east, it's illegal to have that money go directly to candidates, but there's reportedly a program where you had that money funneled into george nader's bank account and then that money went to congressional lawmakers who would then talk about more gavab favorable positions for those countries where the money originally came from. that sounds to me like it might be problematic. >> yes, but to be totally clear, we do not have evidence that either the united arab emirates or saudi arabia was funneling money through nader. what we're talking about is that

the two men were seeking hundreds of millions of dollar and the money for the campaign came out of accounts in their own names. but there was a fun money trail coming out of the uae. >> was there a lobbying campaign for decisions being made for trufor -- >> ithard to know what happens the president's mind. we do know there were -- who

passed them on, who spoke directly with the president about them. >> i see. >> no, go ahead, finish. >> i was going to say, at a time when they were seeking these big contracts. >> i suggest all of you out there go and read this associated press article, it is worth it. desmond butler with the associated press. thank you very much. and if it's tuesday, it's time to kornaki is at one of t big boards with one of the women hoping for a win. do you want $4.95 commissions for stocks, $0.50 options contracts? $1.50 futures contracts? what about a dedicated service team of trading specialists?

did you say yes? good, then it's time for power e*trade. the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. looks like we have a couple seconds left. let's do some card twirling twirling cards e*trade. the original place to invest online.

i'm alex trebek, here to tell you about the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85, and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three p's. what are the three p's? the three p's of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54. alex, what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80. what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85,

call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan, available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock, so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information. and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours just for calling. so call now.

it's the battle of the stacys, stacy abrams and stacy

evans. tell us about the two stacys and what's going on. >> let's take a look at georgia. first of all the backdrop for all this, it's an open governor's race, the republican incumbent is out after two terms. in the presidential race, we know it's been a red state, but a single digit margin, inched a little bit closer, a five digit loss in 2016. at one point in 2016, democrats thought they might do better than lose by five points. there's been an influx of folks coming into the state the last generation or so, a lot of young people, nonwhite people, single women, democrats say, the demographics are turning in the state to favor it, potentially. the question though for a democrat is how do you do it? and that makes this primary so interesting because strategically democrats are being offered two very different paths in georgia.

the polling indicates maybe indicates the front-runner today, her strategy seems to be to expand the democratic pie, saying we democrats are short right now in a state wide election, that means we need to double down on core democratic constituencies, give them more of a reason to come out, more of a reason to participate, expand the electorate that way, that is the message coming out of the abrams side. on the evans message, it's hey, look, the reality is, you want to win as a democrat in georgia in 2018, you got to win over some trump voters, you've got to win over some folks who normally vote republican. you've got to make yourself sort of the exception to that rule. so democrats being offered a choice, this is a big choice for democrats in georgia, it's a big choice for democrats nationally, in the trump era, for a party that lost the presidential election it never thought it was going to lose, is the answer

2020 for democrats nationally? the abrams path, expand the pie, is it the evans path, think about those donald trump strate. very interesting to see how this turns out. >> steve kornacki, we'll be watching. thank you, steve. not canada. we're not going to be watching canada. america. anyway, another race we're keeping a close eye on is the georgia sixth congressional district where four democratic candidates are facing off today. the winner will challenge nominee karen handle in november who you may remember won last november in a closely watched special election. one of the candidates today is lucy mcbath. she jumped in after the parkland school shooting. her son was shot and kill in a gas station in 2012 by a man who complained his music was too loud. you might remember that story. she joins me now.

thank you so much for being here, lucy. my brain is not working today. i'm having a hard time reading canada. we appreciate you being here. thank you for coming on. >> thank you for having me. >> what would you say for you the number one issue is, and what distinguishes you from the other democrats in this race? >> well, of course, it's no secret about my history with gun violence prevention. and, of course, that is a very big issue for me. but i think the thing that also distinguishes me from the other candidates is that a lot of my reality with health care, my reality with educating my child, my reality, these are things that i know that a lot of the constituents, a lot of -- my neighbors are concerned about. and this has been my reality. so i believe that i can speak truth to power, truth to the things that people -- my neighbors are concerned about. i have not spent a lot of time and effort over the years trying to plan to be a politician. or plan my way to washington. but what i do know is what's

important to the people that i've been spending a lot of time and effort with across this district. they're very concerned about how they're going to keep food on their table. they're very concerned about educating their children. they're very concerned about health care. they're very concerned about, you know, unnecessary gun violence. and i can speak to all of those issues, because that has been my reality, as well. >> well, let's talk about where you stand on those issues. do you believe that there should be a ban on assault weapons? >> well, you know, would like to say there are so many different problems and pieces of the gun violence that we're dealing with with this culture. for me, would say that background checks for all gun sales, instituting red flag laws across the nation, and then also just making sure that we are not bringing in that sense of conceal/carry reciprocity across the country. i think those are the number one ways, the broadest ways we can really put a department nt in e gun culture.

banning assault weapons is one small piece of the pie. there are so many other things to do to make the most impact. >> and you mentioned health care as an issue important to constituents. where do you stand on health care? are you for the more progressive wing? made ca medicare for all? or are you looking to shore up the health care law that is already in place? >> well, most definitely, i think that, you know, there might be some issues that we have with our existing health care. however, i don't believe in completely breaking down the entire system. >> i think we fix what's broken, but most definitely, i would love to be able to make sure we cover as many americans as possible, and as many georgians as possible. would love to be able to expand medicaid, give people a robust public option. i think those are really viable options that people need. i want to make sure that we're giving some tax relief to middle income families.

of course when we have people across the state of georgia that don't have access to good state health care, a lot of those expenses, a lot of those are carried on to, you know, people in our state that are able to have private insurance. i think that middle class families need tax relief for their premiums. so just common sense things we can do to make sure that everyone has access to good, quality health care. they deserve that. >> lucy mcbath. lucy, thank you very much. good luck tonight. >> thank you so much. and we've got one more thing for you right after the break. but first -- god. follow me on twitter. facebook, instagram. whatever. stay with us. thanks for the ride-along, captain! i've never been in one of these before, even though geico has been- ohhh. ooh ohh here we go, here we go. you got cut off there, what were you saying? oooo. oh no no. maybe that geico has been proudly serving the military

for over 75 years? is that what you wanted to say? mhmmm. i have to say, you seemed a lot chattier on tv. geico. proudly serving the military for over 75 years. you ok back there, buddy? booking a flight doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go... for the best savings on flights, go to priceline.

hey julie, i know today's critica...a sick day. need... dads don't take sick days... dads take dayquil severe. the non-drowsy, coughing, aching, fever, sore throat, stuffy head, no sick days, medicine.

i thought after sandy hook, where 20 six and seven year olds were slain, this would never happen again. it has happened more than 200 times in 5 years. dianne feinstein and a new generation are leading the fight to pass a new assault weapons ban. say no to the nra and yes to common-sense gun laws. california values senator dianne feinstein say no to the nra and yes to common-sense gun laws. californians are leading against donald trump. our senator should, too. kevin de león is the only candidate for senate who passed laws protecting immigrants from trump... and helped dreamers stay in school. he led bold action against climate change. and only de león fought for universal,

medicare for all. democrat kevin de león the only true progressive for senate. change california now is responsible for the content of this advertising. one more thing before we go. yes, the president tweets like nobody else. but a new report in the "boston globe" suggests it's actually a fa form of you could say art. even when you think a tweet is coming from trump, it may actually be coming from a staffer who, would hard to include, wait for it -- grammatical miscues, random all caps and yes, exclamation points. to be fair, this is not new. presidential speech-writers have always thought to channel their bosses' style and cadence. and it's not just for the president. it's for any writing job, including the very script i am

reading right now. hey, josh telthston. to write for someone, you've got to know them, or at least you should. but as annie lynn ski's team points out, they quote, relish the scoldings trump gets from elites shocked by the trumpian language they strive to imitate, believing that debates over presidential typos fortify the belief within his base that he has the common touch. apparently misspelling is the common touch. so before responding to the next error you, i and his tweets, consider this, your snark is exactly what they want. that will wrap things up for me this hour. kasie hunt picks things up right now from washington. kasie one last thing. this was just revealed by lesley stahl at the deadline club. donald trump in semi private meeting, asked why he's always attacki attacking the press. his answer was, i want to demean you and discredit you so when you do negative stories about me, no one will believe you.

take it away. >> that sounds like some remarkable honesty from the president of the united states. >> and not surprising whatsoever. hein knock lates himself. >> if i were a wife of the president of the united states and a staffer decided they were going to include a typo at my expense i might make an angry phone call. >> what are you talking about, kari? >> nothing at all. katie, thank you. i'm kasie hunt in for ali velshi on a day when north korean diplomacy was expected to dominate the headlines. president trump finds himself on defense on several fronts. in a surprise statement, trump says there is now a substantial chance a meeting with north korea's leader may not work out. and at any moment now, we are expecting to see white house press secretary,